Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Quite unbelievable. We care more about tsunami victims in Sumatra than we do about our own people in NO. In NOLA, the compassionate conservatives blame the victims, the local infrastructure and government, as corpses rot for lack of funding. What's wrong with us?
NOLA emergency response has stopped their search and recovery efforts. No money. That means any remaining bodies will be left to rot until someone else finds them.
So you're saying that Christians under Stalin and Hitler had to submit to, "obey," their government? I have no doubt that both leaders believed they were doing "right" as they slaughtered millions. Would this be the serious and literal or the in context interpretaton.
"Romans 13:1-7"
In the above, are you sure you're seeing the Hand of God, or maybe the hand of Constantine when he declared Christianity to be a legal religion in the empire?
Thank you for explaining this to us, mlsoft. In the Sudan there is an ongoing system of government sponsored genocide. The majority Muslim population believes being Christian is to "do wrong."
Government-sponsored genocide in Sudan:
About 75% of the people of Sudan are Sunni Muslim. Most of the rest are Animists and Christians. The predominately Muslim-controlled government in the north of the country has waged a civil war in Sudan since 1983. On 2000-MAY-02, Newsroom 1 wrote that the conflict has resulted in the deaths of about 2 million people, "mostly Christians and followers of animist religions. While the conflict has many contributing causes, religious factors are the key. 2
http://www.religioustolerance.org/geno_su.htm
"submit himself to the governing authorities"
Oh, I see. Submit to government per the Bible. Saddam, Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, and the rest. I suppose the Kurds were right to submit to Saddam because Saddam believed they had done wrong.
"if you do wrong, be afraid"
All of the above believed those they slaughtered had done wrong.
(Possibly) The Twenty (or so) Worst Things People Have Done to Each Other:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm
Rank Death Toll Cause Centuries
1 55 million Second World War 20C
2 40 million Mao Zedong (mostly famine) 20C
3 40 million Mongol Conquests 13C
4 36 million An Lushan Revolt 8C
5 25 million Fall of the Ming Dynasty 17C
6 20 million Taiping Rebellion 19C
7 20 million Annihilation of the American Indians 15C-19C
8 20 million Iosif Stalin 20C
9 19 million Mideast Slave Trade 7C-19C
10 18 million Atlantic Slave Trade 15C-19C
11 17 million Timur Lenk 14C-15C
12 17 million British India (mostly famine) 19C
13 15 million First World War 20C
14 9 million Russian Civil War 20C
15 9 million Thuggee 13C-19C
16 8 million Fall of Rome 3C-5C
17 8 million Congo Free State 19C-20C
18 7 million Thirty Years War 17C
19 5 million Russia's Time of Troubles 16C-17C
20 4 million Napoleonic Wars 19C
21 3 million Chinese Civil War 20C
22 3 million French Wars of Religion 16C
"the state being given the power of the sword by God"?
Which state? The Soviet Union under Stalin? Saddam's Iraq? Nazi Germany? The USA, California?
Was this power given to all States, or just the ones you approve of?
edit: Only godless-liberals do not support or understand our right to bare assault weapons, or sell them at Walmart. You are a lost soul. Certainly if Jesus were to return he would take up arms against the modern day Pharisee, and urge others to do the same.
Actually, if Jesus were to return, the extreme right would vilify him as a peacenik and a "liberal," maybe even a socialist. The Beatitudes clearly indicate his left leaning tendencies. Tax cuts for the wealthiest, and hungry children of the working poor would be a no-no. I suspect capitalizing on religion for monetary and political gain wouldn't go over too well either. Not sure how he would feel about the holy bumpersticker industry, but that would probably be a problem too. As would the ultra-commercialization and capitalization of Christmas. Fox would have a field day, no doubt, and the American rightwing, the theocratic party would whole heartedly reject him.
Still waiting for the end times?
Who's stupidity? The only difference between Tookie and Berkowitz is who's taken him up as their cause. That, and the fact that NY, that haven of "liberalism," had no death penalty. So Berkowitz becomes the poster boy for salvation, and Tookie is executed.
Is this a great country or what?
Be kind to David. He was a troubled youth. He was adopted. He got in with the wrong crowd. Society was unkind to young David, and his landlord's dog told him to kill. So he did, over and over and over again. Now, he is Forgiven Forever, or so says his website, and he serves as an example to future serial killers everywhere. There is hope. But not so for Tookie, that poor black b*stard. He is to be executed.
An obvious example of something? Just not sure what it is.
Chomsky is a liberal and a fascist and a self hating Jew. Chomsky is a really bad guy.
Did I misunderstand? Locking Berkowitz up is "cruel"? What should we do with him?
Son of Sam is now Son of Hope.
Son of Hope
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/1999/07/16/berkowitz/
"Nothing worked for David. Nothing could fill that emptiness, that void deep inside him. That longing to be loved and accepted. Hmmm,"
He just fell in with the wrong crowd.
__
Son of Sam is now Son of Hope,
http://www.jesusjournal.com/articles/publish/article_42.html
__
David Berkowitz's victims:
29 July 1976 - Donna Lauria, 18
30 Jan 1977 - Christina Freund, 26
8 Mar 1977 - Virginia Voskerichian, 19
17 Apr 1977 - Alexander Esau, 20,
17 Apr 1977 -Valentina Suriani, 18
31 July 1977 -Stacy Moskowitz, 20
http://www.karisable.com/skazberk.htm
__
Berkowitz slaughtered a half dozen young people, and wounded several others. He terrorized the City of NY during the summer of 77. NY did not have the death penalty.
Hypocrisy? A number of fundamentalist Christian organizations actually support this creep, some holding him up as the poster boy for redemption and salvation. But not for Tookie.
__
"culture of life"
Isn't it amazing that so many of the the so-called "culture of life" folks champion a pre-emptive war that has killed 10's of thousands? That the same "culture of life" supports the death penalty, as well as torture? The hypocrisy of it all is truly mind-boggling.
mlsoft, If you were to re-read your posting history, the hypocrisy is amazing, but I doubt you'd understand that. Fundamentalists rarely do.
"I have offered several times for you to show me where Scriptures teach otherwise from what I suggested in my posts."
Mlsoft, I simply find your selective use of the serious and literal vs. the in context interpretation ridiculously hypocritical expecially when adapting Biblical interpretation to suit political belief. Spinning the Bible to suggest Jesus would condone either torture or preemptive war is hideous, but you'll have to figure that out for yourself.
It's about having the moral courage to speak out against injustice. It's character, an attribute completely lacking in today's political establishment. Carter is slammed for his handling of the Iranian hostage crisis. That was a horrendous situation that Carter inherited after decades of US policy in Iran. Iran is a blight on his presidency, but Carter is an inspiring man of intense moral clarity. He is not one to compromise his values or theology for political convenience. He is no hypocrite. He didn't wear his faith on his shirt sleeve, and he respected the lives of all people. If anything, history will probably remember Carter as one of the most moral and religious presidents. Far better than history will remember Bush.
Tonight, Fox aired an incredible propaganda piece on Irag, for free. I'm sure the administration paid nothing for that fluff piece.
Carter seeks moral revival in wake of U.S. social shifts
Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis
November 18, 2005
Former U.S. presidents are becoming more visible of late. George Bush and Bill Clinton, for example, recently took on important tasks related to the Asian tsunami victims as well as those displaced by Hurricane Katrina.
In his new book Our Endangered Values, former President Carter launches a more philosophical mission, publicly lamenting recent changes in America that threaten to strangle the nation's customs and moral commitments. He is deeply troubled by societal shifts - both in religion and politics - that are tarnishing the image of the United States and threatening to permanently divide our own citizens.
Carter has never been one to shy away from discussions of right and wrong. In his previous best-seller, Living Faith, this deeply religious Southern Baptist discussed openly the values that shaped his personal and political life. His humanitarian work is legendary, particularly at The Carter Center, a nonprofit organization aimed at preventing and resolving conflicts, enhancing freedom and democracy, and improving health worldwide. For this he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.
In this somewhat slim volume, written in the straightforward manner of a text, Carter moves smoothly and quickly from one topic to the next, spelling out the issues that trouble him most.
One concern is a trend toward a more intense form of fundamentalism, where militant and often abusive authoritarian males consider themselves superior and subjugate women.
From there, he segues into a wide range of public issues. For example, Carter makes it clear that he isn't happy about the way the United States deals with "illegal enemy combatants" in the wake of 9/11. Their blatant mistreatment flies in the face of Geneva Convention policies, he writes.
Carter details the U.S. practice of transferring certain prisoners to countries that condone torture, where they are then subjected to techniques that are "indescribably terrible," such as the partial boiling of a hand or arm, a torture that has been reported by a U.S. ambassador. In at least two cases, he writes, this resulted in prisoners being boiled to death.
The former president also discusses science vs. religious beliefs, divorce, homosexuality, abortion, the death penalty, preemptive war and environmental threats. "America is by far the world's leading polluter," he writes, "and our government's abandonment of its responsibilities is just another tragic step in a series of actions that have departed from the historic bipartisan protection of the global environment."
Carter believes the greatest challenge of the new millennium is closing the gap between the world's rich and poor. He points out that while the average American family makes $45,000 a year, more than half the world's people live on less than $2 a day, and 1.2 billion live on just a dollar a day. Nevertheless, he says, the United States shares just 16 cents of every $100 with poor nations, instead pouring money into the military budget. "It now exceeds $400 billion annually, equal to the total in all other nations combined."
While the book is reactionary in style, it offers little in the way of recommendations for change. Carter simply calls for a revival of the moral values for which the United States has struggled the last 230 years.
At the book's rather abrupt conclusion, he takes a dig at government policy (fueled by huge political contributions) that bows to the firearms and tobacco industries, despite the fact that they're both producing products that contribute more to death than to life.
Regarding guns, he says, "The National Rifle Association, the firearms industry, and compliant politicians should REASSESS THEIR POLICIES CONCERNING SAFETY AND ACCOUNTABILITY"(caps his). As for tobacco companies, he remarks that they "have won the much more important battle by blocking any effective federal regulations of carcinogens in their highly publicized products."
Carter may not have the answers, but he well knows where the problems lie. This book is a worthy read for those who are concerned about the nation's problems and want to see the issues spelled out more clearly by someone who has shared in the secrets and responsibilities of the Oval Office.
Verna Noel Jones is a freelance writer for the Rocky Mountain News, the Chicago Tribune and various magazines. She lives in Aurora.
"both seriously and literally"
Unless it's not politically convenient to do so, such as with torture or pre-emptive war. Then we do it "in context."
"Respond to active evil will with active good will."
But you're entitled to your own hypocrisy. We're all guilty to some extent.
Once Upon a Time in America
There were Honorable, Republican Leaders -- A Salute to General and President Dwight David Eisenhower
by Lonna Gooden VanHorn
November 14, 2005
http://www.opednews.com
Once Upon a Time in America We had Good, Honorable, Republican Leaders…
By Lonna Gooden VanHorn, November 14, 2005
In “Where Have the Honorable Republicans Been?” Andrew Bard Schmookler mourns the fact that Republicans who many Democrats have regarded as worthy of respect have not spoken out about this administration that is ruining their party, as well as destroying America. He listed John McCain, Howard Baker, and Warren Rudman among those "honorable Republicans."
In “We’re Not in Lake Woebegone Any More,” Garrison Keillor wrote:
“Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party. Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and Prohibitionists, the antipapist antiforeigner element. The genial Eisenhower was their man, a genuine American hero of D-Day, who made it OK for reasonable people to vote Republican.”
A Vietnam veteran friend of mine wrote that if he saw John McCain hug G.W. Bush one more time, he was going to puke. McCain obviously both liked and respected John Kerry, and to his credit, he defended him against scurrilous attacks and asked that the president specifically denounce attacks by the Swift Boat Veterans. But, being the unprincipled “do whatever it takes to win” man that he is, Bush knew the ads were effective, and he did not specifically denounce them. As for McCain, have his own presidential ambitions superceded his conscience? Is that why he supported Bush in 2004? In return for promises of support in 2008?
Like Schmookler, I do not hate all Republicans. To the list of decent Republican leaders he named, I would add Chuck Hagel, Ron Paul, and Jim Leach, among others. And like Keillor, in my research over the past few years Dwight D. Eisenhower has become one of my heroes, for a number of reasons. Below I have condensed an article in which I quoted what he and other war heroes had said and compared it to what Bush/co said.
I have many of these quotations in large print on my “book on wheels.”
These quotes and the fact that under Ike the richest among us were taxed at 90% and corporations at 52% and against Republican pressure he refused to support lowering those rates are why I consider Ike a hero.
In his farewell address Ike warned that the interests of the military-industrial complex would come to determine policy. The rage a decent man like him – a man who cared about his soldiers -- would feel against a president and vice-president who stood to gain politically and/or financially from a war they fear-mongered and misled the country into largely to benefit their former companies and corporate campaign contributors would know no bounds!! I believe Ike would have considered Bush/Cheney/Rice/Rumsfeld among the “domestic enemies” he had sworn as a soldier to protect this country against!”
Read his words and weep!!
General and President Eisenhower:
“A preventive war, to my mind, is an impossibility. I don’t believe there is such a thing, and frankly I wouldn’t even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked to me about such a thing.”
“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.”
“May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.”
“There is no way in which a country can satisfy the craving for absolute security, but it can bankrupt itself morally and economically in attempting to reach that illusory goal through arms alone.”
“Controlled, universal disarmament is the imperative of our time. The demand for it by the hundreds of millions whose chief concern is the long future of themselves and their children will, I hope, become so universal and so insistent that no man, no government anywhere, can withstand it.”
and
“If men can develop weapons that are so terrifying as to make the thought of global war include almost a sentence for suicide, you would think that man's intelligence and his comprehension... would include also his ability to find a peaceful solution.”
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist”
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms in not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron…
What can the world, or any nation in it, hope for if no turning is found on this dread road? The worst to be feared and the best to be expected can be simply stated.
The worst is atomic war.
The best would be this: a life of perpetual fear and tension; a burden of arms draining the wealth and the labor of all peoples; a wasting of strength that defies the American system or the Soviet system or any system to achieve true abundance and happiness for the peoples of this earth.”
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”
General Douglas McArthur:
“I have known war as few men now living know it. It’s very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling international disputes.”
“The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear: Keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real.”
“We have had our last chance. If we do not devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door.”
General Omar Bradley:
“The world has achieved brilliance without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.”
“War can be prevented as just as surely as it can be provoked, and we who fail to prevent it must share the guilt for the dead.”
Marine Commandant General David Shoup:
I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar-crooked fingers out of the business of these nations so full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of their own. One that they design and want, one that they fight and work for. And if, unfortunately, their revolution must be of the violent type because the "haves" refused to share with the "have nots" by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and not the American style, which they don’t want and above all don’t want crammed down their throats by Americans.
Shoup resigned his commission in 1963 because he did not believe the Vietnam War was worth one American life.
Marine Major General Smedley D. Butler one of only two, two time Congressional Medal of Honor Winners:
“War is just a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.
A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses… of course it isn’t put that crudely in wartime… It is dressed into speeches about patriotism and love of country and putting one’s shoulder to the wheel, but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket and are safely pocketed.”
There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket. There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-NationalisticCapitalism…
I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps… And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.”
Others:
“If we go in (to Iraq) unilaterally, or without the full weight of international organizations behind us, if we go in with a very sparse number of allies, if we go in without an effective information operation… we’re liable to supercharge recruiting for al-Qaida.” <> General Wesley Clark
“It’s pretty interesting that all the generals see it the same way, and all the others who have never fired a shot, and are hot to go to war, see it another…We are about to do something that will ignite a fuse in this region that we will rue the day we ever started…”
General Anthony Zinni, former Head of Central Command for U.S. Forces in the Middle East.
Under Eisenhower the richest among us were taxed at more than 90% and corporations at 52%, and against Republican pressure, Ike refused to support lowering those rates. There were also, not then, the offshore tax havens for corporate cheats, like Halliburton, that there are now. Eisenhwoer would never have advocated cutting taxes during war time!! I think he would have considered that treason
Tax cuts for the rich do not fuel our economy, war spending fuels our economy.
I have on the door of my “book on wheels”
Question: Do you believe Congress voted for tax cuts for the rich because
(1) they believe taking in less revenue will help pay the country’s bills,
or
(2) because they like the president are rich, and they, like the president couldn’t wait to get their hands on an extra $90,000 a year or so, and to heck with the needs of the country??
Only the soldiers and their families are asked to make any kind of a sacrifice, while many at the top are enriching themselves from war profits. The tax cuts for the rich that have been one of this administrations top priorities from the beginning, guarantee they will pay even less taxes on their “blood money.” Soldiers now, like soldiers in the past are beginning to see this and resent it.
Stewart Nusbaumer, who lost a leg in Vietnam wrote in “The Cost of War at Walter Reed”
“To this day, some 38 years later, when I hear someone on the radio discuss the World Series in 1967, or some similar remark about 1967, I cringe. That was the year I was fighting in Vietnam. That was the year thousands of young Americans were dying and losing limbs and their minds for, supposedly, their country. But our country was excited about the World Series, and....
“If a war is important enough for soldiers to be maimed and to die for, it is important enough for all Americans to sacrifice something. Something!”
But those in this administration will sacrifice NOTHING, and they do not ask the people, except the soldiers and their families, to sacrifice anything!! But the corporate greed and enabling they are fostering guarantees the common people, including the veterans who fought wars that made many of the too rich, (like Bush, Sr. from the Carlyle Group, richer), will have a lower standard of living. We have already seen this happening to airline employees, and now to GM employees. It is a given that other automobile manufacturers will follow GM’s lead.
Right now the soldiers are paying, but the “heroes walls” the cutesy little news anchors gushed over during the 2003 invasion are gone. The war is old news. When the broadcast media does have to cover what is happening in Iraq, it is almost as if they begrudge the airtime. One soldier wrote that that was what hurt the worst. Seeing ducks caught in a storm drain being covered as news, while news of American casualties in Iraq was relegated to the newswrap that snakes across the bottom of the television screen.
Another soldier on his second tour in Iraq wrote:
“There are battles which need to be fought and battles which serve no good purpose. Afghanistan and Bin Laden lay forgotten as if they were discarded toys left by a spoiled child. Iraq is the new frontier of poor foreign policy and poor planning. Even the soldiers can see it. Why do you think nobody is re-enlisting? They don’t want to fight a losing battle, and to die for an empty promise… that somehow staying in Iraq makes America safer. We have created a martyr factory here, and we are beginning to wade through the next Vietnam. How wrong do you want to be before you send the troops home” 2000 dead…How about 10,000?”
BUT… they are not your kids. They are not G. W. Bush’s kids.
Ike, that good man, would consider them his kids…
Bio: Lonna Gooden VanHorn was born and raised on a small farm in Minnesota. She is the mother of 6, a grandmother, and the wife of a Vietnam veteran. Formely a person who did not "get involved" in controversy, she has decided to become a trouble maker in her old age. Lonna has articles on many websites. Archives of some of her articles may be accessed here: http://www.opednews.com/archivesgoodenvanhornlonna.htm and here http://oldamericancentury.org/vanhorn_bio.htm Pictures of her “book on wheels” may be accessed here: http://oldamericancentury.org/lonna_002.htm Click on the thumbnails, and the pictures will enlarge so must of what is on the signs can be read. If you would like transcripts of the entire contents of her information truck, e-mail jvanhorn@peoplepc.com and she will send you her truck file as an attachment.
Dissent is not treason
By: David Hutchinson
Issue date: 11/23/05 Section: Opinion
Article Tools: Page 1 of 1
During the past week, the White House has been publicly defending itself against charges that the case for war against Iraq was manipulated by the administration. In front of military audiences, which have become a far-too-common platform for the president, he has said that criticism of his administration is detrimental to the morale of our soldiers and sends the wrong message to our enemies. Basically, though not in as strong language, the president is equating dissent with treason. This is not the first time; Attorney General Ashcroft said in front of a Congressional panel that critics of the administration "only aid terrorists" and that they give "ammunition to America's enemies."
President Bush said on Veterans Day: "The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them. Our troops deserve to know that this support will remain firm when the going gets tough. And our troops deserve to know that whatever our differences in Washington, our will is strong, our nation is united, and we will settle for nothing less than victory."
The president is the traitor, not anyone who has questions about the war. This is not a partisan Democrat issue, nor is it part of some far-left opposition. Recent polls show that a majority of the American people have concerns about the case for war. And why shouldn't they? No weapons have been found. Iraq seems to have not been an "imminent threat" to the security of this country. The president wants to forget this and say that critics are rewriting history, but that was where his authority to go to war came from.
The legislature has is partly to blame; they should never have handed over this authority to be abused by the president. Hopefully, the voters will remember this in the next election and call these politicians to account. The legislature voted to give the president this far-reaching authority, and now they are questioning the case for war. But who will call the president to account on this matter? Just because they gave him unprecedented authority does not mean they should not act on the behalf of the American people now. Who else can?
Dissent is far from treasonous, and is actually more patriotic than just going along with everything. The soldiers, and I was once a soldier, should know that they are utilized for warfare in appropriate circumstances where it is absolutely necessary. A patriot does not sit back and allow injustice and abuse of power. The founders of our country knew this. If they had simply accepted authority without question, there would never have been a rebellion against England.
It takes a lot more than simply putting a flag in front of your house and sticking decorative magnetic ribbons on your car to be a patriot! Lazy people pretending to be patriots are everywhere lately. Case in point, turnout in last weeks election in Franklin County was the lowest in the state, not even crossing 30 percent. Patriots love their country and defends it; they do not allow injustice and creeping tyranny to destroy it. They are not armchair patriots; they vote and ask questions. If we were misled into war, it must be exposed. This goes beyond our current war - this is necessary to restore faith in our system for the future.
The president says that dissent sends the wrong message to our soldiers and enemies. This is not the wrong message - it is reality. Many people, the majority in fact, have questions about the case for war. If the president's administration did not mislead us, they have nothing to fear in these inquiries: they will be absolved of wrongdoing. This is not a partisan political issue, it is a serious concern , one that exists, regardless of what the president wants to say about it.
David Hutchinson is a graduate student in the School of Communication. He can be reaced for comment at hutchinson.102@osu.edu.
http://www.thelantern.com/media/paper333/news/2005/11/23/Opinion/Dissent.Is.Not.Treason-1113295.shtm...
Mlsoft, I wasn't looking for a history lesson. I asked, if Israel bombs Iran, and all hell breaks loose over there, will you and/or your family sign up to fight the good fight over there.
As for Rev., yes, we have discussed it before. Protestants from the US South take it far more seriously, "literally," than anyone else. The majority of Christian denominations have noted issues with authenticity, many Christian denominations, including those using the oldest texts, do not include it at all in their Testament. But if you guys want to sit around and wait, be my guest.
What does all of this have to do with our ridiculous strike on Iraq?
The Abuse of 'Democracy'
by Lawrence S. Wittner
George W. Bush’s recent claim that the U.S. war in Iraq is part of an attempt to spread “democracy” to the Middle East should not surprise anyone familiar with the use of that word to camouflage sordid realities.
When, in the aftermath of World War II, Stalin had the Soviet Union gobble up the nations of Eastern Europe, he christened them People’s Democracies – although they were neither democratic nor meant to be. This debasement of “democracy” and other noble terms such as “freedom” and “peace” to crude propaganda was undoubtedly what George Orwell had in mind when he wrote his powerful novel, 1984, which portrayed a nightmarish society in which words were turned inside out to justify the policies of cynical and unscrupulous rulers.
Unfortunately, however, “democracy” has also been abused throughout American history. In the nineteenth century, land-hungry politicians, slaveholders, and businessmen defended the U.S. conquest of new territory by claiming that it would extend the area of democracy and freedom. In the twentieth century, President Woodrow Wilson grandly proclaimed that U.S. participation in World War I would “make the world safe for democracy.” A few decades later, Washington officials again sanctified U.S. policy by invoking democracy, for they declared repeatedly that the U.S. role in the Cold War was designed to defend the “Free World.” Indeed, it would be hard to find a U.S. war or expansionist enterprise that was not accompanied by enthusiastic rhetoric about supporting democracy.
In fairness, it should be noted that the U.S. government has economically and militarily supported many democratic nations. After World War II, it forged alliances with a good number of them.
But it has also provided military and economic assistance to numerous nations ruled by bloody dictatorships, including Franco’s Spain, Chiang Kai-Shek’s China, the Shah’s Iran, Somoza’s Nicaragua, Batista’s Cuba, Sukarno’s Indonesia, the Saud family’s Saudi Arabia, Diem’s South Vietnam, Duvalier’s Haiti, Marcos’s Philippines, the Colonels’ Greece, and many other tyrannies. Indeed, the term “Free World” originally included Stalin’s Russia. And, not so long ago, the U.S. government had no scruples about providing military assistance to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Furthermore, on occasion the U.S. government has sought to overthrow democratic governments. Three of its success stories along these lines occurred in Mossadeq’s Iran, Arbenz’s Guatemala, and Allende’s Chile, where democratic governments were succeeded by vicious dictatorships. Based upon this record, observers might well conclude that, for U.S. officials, the defense of democracy has been less important as a motive than as a marketing device.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/wittner/wittner16.html
___
Learning to love Big Brother
George W. Bush channels George Orwell
Daniel Kurtzman
Sunday, July 28, 2002
Here's a question for constitutional scholars: Can a sitting president be charged with plagiarism?
As President Bush wages his war against terrorism and moves to create a huge homeland security apparatus, he appears to be borrowing heavily, if not ripping off ideas outright, from George Orwell. The work in question is "1984, " the prophetic novel about a government that controls the masses by spreading propaganda, cracking down on subversive thought and altering history to suit its needs. It was intended to be read as a warning about the evils of totalitarianism -- not a how-to manual.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/07/28/IN244190.DTL
The so-called Arab democracy summit breaks down over who controls the purse strings as well. We are, and have always been, in the mideast for oil. It all comes down to money.
U.S.-backed Mideast democracy summit fails
Egypt derails agreement at international conference intended to advance democracy in the Middle East.
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/auto/epaper/editions/sunday/news_34673fe35296622600aa.html
In a surprise move, Egypt, which accounts for more than half the Arab world's population and is the second-largest recipient of U.S. aid, derailed the Forum for the Future by demanding that Arab governments have significant control over which pro-democracy groups would receive aid from a new fund.
Stephanie, That is what is know as the Coalition of the Bribed. The true cost of the fiasco is being grossly under reported.
Why not give Rupert Murdoch a no bid contract on the Iraqi media? Afghanistan too. He's done such a fine job in the US.
December 1, 2005
Ron Reagan Jr. Blasts Bush's Propaganda Campaign as a Threat to Iraqi Democracy and to U.S. Troops
by Andy Ostroy
http://www.opednews.com
Just when you thought the Bush administration couldn't possibly appear any more corrupt, another scandal surfaces that further demonstrates the unethical and possibly criminal lengths this unsavory bunch will go to to promote and protect its selfish interests. The latest controversy involves the Pentagon's $100 million classified contract awarded to Washington, D.C. public relations firm The Lincoln Group to write pro-war propaganda articles, translate them into Arabic and have them published in Iraqi newspapers, appearing to be written by legitimate reporters of the mainstream Iraqi press.
Appearing on MSNBC's Hardball Thursday, correspondent Ron Reagan Jr., a truly solid citizen, called this campaign of deception "a disaster," saying it undermines the entire mission in Iraq at this point to create a legitimate Democracy and a free and independent press. "We're supposed to be setting an example for these people. They've lived under a dictator for years who tortured people; for whom the news was whatever he said it was. These people are looking to us for something better, and what do we give them? We give them Abu Ghraib and this kind of nonsense."
Late Thursday Sen. John Warner (R-VA), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said an inquiry will begin Friday into the Pentagon's campaign to covertly plant stories and pay reporters for the bogus news. Warner issued a statement that said "A free and independent press is critical to the functioning of a Democracy." Exactly. Up to now we have the president, who's sent 160,000 troops into battle under the new justification of spreading Democracy (2100 of them to die), secretly undercutting his own mission by manufacturing and buying his own press coverage, and in the process severely undermining the goal of creating a legitimate, credible mainstream press in Iraq.
In his speech Wednesday at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD, Bush said: "We will help the Iraqi people lay the foundations of a strong Democracy that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself." Apparently, Bush's idea of a strong Democracy is one where its citizens have little trust in the garbage they read in the so-called free press because its crammed with American propaganda.
What this administration is doing here is reprehensible, and adversarial to what we say we're doing in Iraq. And as Reagan Jr. pointed out, it's further inciting the insurgents, which ultimately places our troops in greater danger. "If you were part of the insurgency right now you couldn't have asked for a better story to undercut what the president was saying Wednesday, and you couldn't have asked for a better story to say to your constituency, 'I told you so.'
Additionally, editors of Iraqi newspapers that have published the Pentagon propaganda have been receiving death threats for appearing to be too close to, and controlled by, America. This will also hamper Iraq's ability to build a free and independent press. If editors are not safe, or if they cannot be trusted, and if the Iraqi people have little faith in the integrity and independence of its media, there's little hope for a legitimate press thriving in that country.
So far, senior Pentagon officials are saying little and denying involvement in the propaganda scandal. But it's hard to imagine that a $100 million classified contract's been doled out and the higher-ups don't know about it. Further, anything war-related that's released to the media must first be cleared by the Pentagon's Office of Public Affairs. This is not the sort of project that could've squeaked by unnoticed at the top.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday attributed the positive news to Iraq's burgeoning legitimate press, citing its 100+ newspapers, 72 radio stations and 44 television stations. "The country has a free media, It's a relief valve. They're debating things and talking, and arguing and discussing." Sure. And Armstrong Williams was simply speaking his own mind too. Liars, liars, Liars! Man, will it ever stop?
Regarding the alleged progress we're making in Iraq, the most salient point comes again from Reagan Jr.: "If there's so much good news coming out of Iraq, why do we have to pay Iraqi journalists to report it? They should be doing it on their own. Maybe there just isn't a lot of good news over there to report."
As for the Bush culture of corruption and cronyism, the head of The Lincoln Group, 30-year-old Christian Bailey, is a former hedgefund operator who's previously run four companies and is a director and NYC co-chair of Lead 21, an organization of young, affluent Republicans. Apparently his GOP connections helped bag him a nice fat $100 million contract.
The stench of corruption emanating from the White House is enough to make you sick.
"Today, when we New Orleanians travel around the country, we are comforted by a tremendous outpouring of sympathy from ordinary Americans. Many have given generously to charities for Katrina victims. We also hear people talk about how things must be getting back to normal."
The compassion and efforts of American kids to aid the victims has truly been impressive. The American administration is another story. If you listen to the rhetoric coming for the Bush regime, the only reasonable conclusion is they cared more about Iraqis on the other side of the globe than they cared for Americans in NOLA.
Then there was their efforts to blame the victims. They should have gotten out. Poverty is their own fault, etc. And this from the wealthiest, most powerful folks in the US. It's repulsive.
If Israel goes to war with Iran, will you folks in the Amen Corner sign on to fight the good fight? Will your families? What better opportunity to save them from the rapture than that?
"I will bless those who bless you"
It might be the duty of the Amen Corner to do so, if I'm reading Genesis "in context."
You don't know why?
* More than 2000 Americans are dead.
* Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have perished including women and children.
* We have spent hundreds of billions, and will need to spend hundreds of billions more to correct the destruction we've brought to that country.
* We have created a terrorist hub in Iraq where none existed before.
* The administration's unilateralist arrogance has caused us to be almost universally despised.
You're okay with all of this?
Maybe Bush attacked the wrong country? But, hey, stuff happens, an honest mistake.
Iran, Russia Sign $1 Bln Defense Deal
2005-12-3 3:34:47 CRIENGLISH.com
(A Russian air defence missile system is seen in an undated file photo. Russia plans to sell more than $1 billion worth of tactical surface-to-air missiles and other defense hardware to Iran, media reported on Friday. Photo: Reuters)
Russia plans to sell more than $1 billion worth of tactical surface-to-air missiles and other defense hardware to Iran, media reported on Friday.
Moscow is already at odds with the West over its nuclear ties with Tehran but has sought to use its warm relations with Iran to be recognized as a key mediator between the West and the Islamic Republic.
U.S. Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns, visiting Moscow, told Ekho Moskvy radio he had raised the issue of arms sales to Iran with Russia's Foreign Ministry.
"For the past 25 years, in our opinion, Iran has supported terrorists in the Middle East, in the United States, and that is why we have very bad relations with them. You can understand why we do not support the sale of weapons to such a country," he said in comments simultaneously translated into Russian.
The Vedomosti business daily cited military sources as saying Iran would buy 29 TOR-M1 systems designed to bring down aircraft and guided missiles at low altitudes.
The paper, calling it the biggest sale of Russian defense hardware to Iran for about five years, said Moscow and Tehran had already signed the contract.
Interfax news agency separately quoted a source as saying the deal, which would also include modernizing Iran's air force and supplying some patrol boats, was worth more than $1 billion.
The move, likely to irritate Israel and the United States, could strain Moscow's efforts to broker a deal between Iran and European negotiators aimed at breaking a deadlock over Tehran's nuclear programme.
Israel in particular is nervous about Iran's military potential after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in October that Israel should be "wiped off the map" -- comments condemned by Russia at the time.
WEST SUSPECTS IRAN
Russia's Defense Ministry declined to comment on the deal. Officials at state arms exporter Rosoboronexport, Russia's state defense supplier, were not available for comment.
Western countries suspect Iran of seeking nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian atomic programme, which Tehran denies, saying it wants only to generate electricity.
Russia is helping Iran build its first nuclear reactor and is preparing to launch it next year. Some in the West fear that Iran could use Russian know-how to make sensitive weapons.
The defense industry source told Interfax there were no international restrictions on selling weapons to Iran.
"Moreover, practically all the weapons that Russia is delivering to Iran in the coming years are defensive rather than offensive in character," the source said.
One Western diplomat who closely watches Russia-Iran dealings said news of the deal was alarming and would further increase tensions.
"Russia has long positioned itself as a major peace broker between Iran and the West -- and all of a sudden they are throwing this bombshell. It just does not make any sense," said the diplomat, who asked to remain anonymous.
(Source: Reuters)
http://en.chinabroadcast.cn/2239/2005-12-5/114@285729.htm
Explosions Rock Oil Depot North of London
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1394811
Israel plans strike on nuclear Iran
Sharon tells military to prepare
for attack on key sites in March
Posted: December 11, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has ordered his defense forces to plan for a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear weapons facilities by the end of March – the time intelligence sources say Tehran will be able to begin producing nuclear weapons.
The directive came after Iran's President Mahmoud Amadinejad this week suggested Israel should be moved to Europe.
Iran has been ignoring warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency about its plans to continue enriching uranium.
In early March, Mohamed El-Baradei, the head of the IAEA, will present his next report on Iran. El-Baradei, who received the Nobel peace prize yesterday, warned that the world was "losing patience" with Iran.
Defense sources in Israel believe the end of March to be the "point of no return," after which Iran will have the technical expertise to enrich uranium in sufficient quantities to build a nuclear warhead in two to four years.
"Israel — and not only Israel — cannot accept a nuclear Iran," Sharon warned recently. "We have the ability to deal with this and we’re making all the necessary preparations to be ready for such a situation."
The order to prepare for a possible attack went through the Israeli defense ministry to the chief of staff, according to a report today in the London Sunday Times.
Israeli intelligence has reportedly identified a number of Iranian uranium enrichment sites unknown to the IAEA, according to the Times.
If a military operation is approved, Israel will reportedly use a combination of air and ground forces against several nuclear targets in the hope of stalling Tehran’s nuclear program for years..
The Times reports Israel would likely call on its top special forces brigade, Unit 262 and the F-15I strategic 69 Squadron, which can strike Iran and return to Israel without refueling.
Russia last week signed an estimated $1 billion contract to sell Iran advanced Tor-M1 systems capable of destroying guided missiles and laser-guided bombs from aircraft.
"Once the Iranians get the Tor-M1, it will make our life much more difficult," an Israeli air force source told the Times. "The installation of this system can be relatively quick and we can’t waste time on this one."
Previous stories:
Iran only months away from nuke?
Russia equips Iran for war
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GW did Iraq because he thought he could. Iran would have fought back. Typically bully move. The real winner of Iraq will be Iran.
Nuclear threat 'imminent' says Nobel Prize winner
10/12/2005 - 09:36:22
Mohamed ElBaradei and the International Atomic Energy Agency were accepting the Nobel Peace Prize today at a time when fears of nuclear attacks, possibly by terrorists, were as great as ever.
The award, being presented at a ceremony in Oslo, in part marks the 60th anniversary of 1945 atomic bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan.
Six decades later and 15 years after the end of the Cold War, the threat of nuclear nightmares remains strong, especially with terrorists actively seeking atomic weapons, ElBaradei said at a news conference yesterday.
“The threat is imminent,” he said.
The five-member Norwegian awards committee selected the 63-year-old Egyptian and the agency he leads for the prize in recognition of their drive to curb the spread of nuclear weapons and keep them out of the hands of terror groups.
“At a time when disarmament efforts appear deadlocked, when there is a danger that nuclear arms will spread both to states and to terrorist groups, and when nuclear power again appears to be playing an increasingly significant role, IAEA’s work is of incalculable importance,” the committee said in the citation issued in October when the decision on the award’s recipient was announced.
Meanwhile, the IAEA and much of the world community are now at odds with Iran over its nuclear program. They also suspect that North Korea may be developing nuclear weapons and fear that terrorist groups could be closing in on nuclear materials.
At his news conference, ElBaradei said he hoped to see Iran step up its cooperation with the agency, based in Vienna, Austria, so that an agreement can be reached within the next few months without, for example, having to take the matter to the UN Security Council to seek sanctions.
“And of course there is the horrible idea of nuclear terrorism,” he said.
© Thomas Crosbie Media, 2005.
If these Christians were worth their salt, mlsoft, they would drop their anti-torture foolishness, and anti-war treason, and focus themselves on WALMART. Don't they know there's a war on Christmas going on?
Maybe Jesus was of a "liberal denomination"?
"liberal denominations who reject the authority and truth of the Scriptures." "In context, of course."
-- Mlsoft 12:09
More from the "liberal" bishops "who reject the authority and truth of the Scriptures in context." I bet they're not okay with torture either. Bush's bishops:
The entire text of the statement is as follows:
A Call to Repentance and Peace with Justice
As followers of Jesus Christ, who named peacemakers as blessed children of God, we call upon The United Methodist Church to join us in repentance and renewed commitment to Christ's reign of compassion, justice, reconciliation, and peace.
As elected and consecrated bishops of the church, we repent of our complicity in what we believe to be the unjust and immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq. In the face of the United States Administration's rush toward military action based on misleading information, too many of us were silent. We confess our preoccupation with institutional enhancement and limited agendas while American men and women are sent to Iraq to kill and be killed, while thousands of Iraqi people needlessly suffer and die, while poverty increases and preventable diseases go untreated. Although we value the sacrifices of the men and women who serve in the military, we confess our betrayal of the scriptural and prophetic authority to warn the nations that true security lies not in weapons of war, but in enabling the poor, the vulnerable, the marginalized to flourish as beloved daughters and sons of God. We confess our failure to make disciples of Jesus Christ and to be a people who welcome and love all those for whom Christ died.
Aware that we are to bring forth fruit worthy of repentance, we personally and as bishops commit ourselves to:
Pray daily for the end of war in general and the Iraq war specifically; for those who suffer as the result of war, including the soldiers and their families; the Iraqi people in their struggle to find a workable form of government; and for the leaders of the United States that they will turn to truth, humility, and policies of peace through justice.
Reclaim the prophetic authority that calls nations, individuals, and communities to live faithfully in the light of God's new creation where all people know their identity as beloved children of God; where justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream; and where barriers are removed and all creation is healed, reconciled, and renewed.
Commit ourselves to peacemaking as an integral component of our own Christian discipleship, which means advocating and actively working for the things that make for peace: personal, institutional, and governmental priorities that protect the poor and most vulnerable; modeling an end to prejudice toward people of other faiths and cultures; confronting differences and conflicts with grace, humility, dialogue, and respect without being so cautious in confronting evil that we lose our moral authority.
We call upon all United Methodists to join in the pursuit of peace through justice as revealed in Holy Scripture and incarnate in Jesus Christ.
Let us move beyond caution rooted in self protection and recover moral authority anchored in commitment to Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace.
Let us object with boldness when governing powers offer solutions of war that conflict with the gospel message of self-emptying love.
Let us with compassion share the pain of God's children who suffer from the devastation of war and those who live in poverty resulting from misplaced priorities and misguided public policies.
Let us work toward unity in a world of diversity, that all peoples will come to know that we belong to one another, and that "in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself … and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us"(2 Corinthians 5:19).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bishop Daniel C. Arichea, Jr., Baquio City, Philippines
Bishop George W. Bashore, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Bishop Thomas J. Bickerton, Pittsburg Area
Bishop Bruce P. Blake, Winfield Kansas
Bishop Benjamin Boni, Côte D'Ivoire Area, West Africa
Bishop Warner H. Brown, Jr., Denver Area
Bishop Monk Bryan, Lake Junaluska, North Carolina
Bishop Minerva G. Carcaño, Phoenix Area
Bishop Kenneth L. Carder, Durham, North Carolina
Bishop Roy C. Clark, Nashville, Tennessee
Bishop Judith Craig, Powell, Ohio
Bishop Sudarshana Devadhar, New Jersey Area
Bishop William W. Dew, Jr, Danville, California
Bishop Jesse R. DeWitt, Dexter, Michigan
Bishop R. Sheldon Duecker, Fort Wayne, Indiana
Bishop Sally Dyck, Minnesota Area
Bishop R. Kern Eutsler, Mechanicsville, Virginia
Bishop Violet Fisher, New York West Area
Bishop Eugene M. Frank, Kansas City, Missouri
Bishop Elias G. Galvan, Scottsdale, Arizona
Bishop William Boyd Grove, Charleston, West Virginia
Bishop Susan W. Hassinger, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
Bishop Robert E. Hayes, Jr., Oklahoma Area
Bishop J. Woodrow Hearn, Galveston, Texas
Bishop Kenneth W. Hicks, Little Rock, Arkansas
Bishop Leroy C. Hodapp, Evansville, Indiana
Bishop Robert T. Hoshibata, Portland Area
Bishop Janice Riggle Huie, Houston Area
Bishop John G. Innis, Liberia Area, West Africa
Bishop Neil L. Irons, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
Bishop S. Clifton Ives, Portland, Maine
Bishop Rueben P. Job, Goodlettsville, Tennessee
Bishop Alfred Johnson, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Bishop L. Bevel Jones III, Decatur, Georgia
Bishop Charles Wesley Jordan, Upland, California
Bishop Hee-Soo Jung, Chicago Area
Benjamin A. Justo, Baguio Area, Philippines
Bishop Charlene P. Kammerer, Richmond Area
Bishop Leontine Kelly, San Mateo, California
Bishop Deborah Lieder Kiesey, Dakotas Area
Bishop James R. King, Jr., Louisville Area
Bishop Walter Klaiber, Tuebingen, Germany
Bishop J. Lloyd Knox, St. Petersburg, Florida
Bishop Arthur Kulah, Monrovia, Liberia
Bishop Clay F. Lee, Jr., Bryam, Mississippi
Bishop Linda Lee, Wisconsin Area
Bishop William B. Lewis, Edwardsville, Illinois
Bishop Ernest S. Lyght, West Virginia Area
Bishop James K. Mathews, Bethesda, Maryland
Bishop Marcus Matthews, Philadelphia Area
Bishop Felton E. May, Little Rock, Arkansas
Bishop Calvin D. McConnell, Portland, Oregon
Bishop J. Lawrence McCleskey, Charlotte Area
Bishop Marshall L. Meadors, Jr., Anderson, South Carolina
Bishop Jane Allen Middleton, Harrisburg Area
Bishop C. P. Minnick, Jr., Raleigh, North Carolina
Bishop Ruediger R. Minor, Dresden, Germany
Bishop Robert C. Morgan, Birmingham, Alabama
Bishop Susan Murch Morrison, Albany Area
Bishop Albert Frederick (Fritz) Mutti, Kansas City, Missouri
Bishop Abel T. Muzorewa, Harare, Zimbabwe
Bishop William B. Oden, Dallas, Texas
Bishop Benjamin R. Oliphint, Houston, Texas
Bishop Donald A. Ott, Pewaukee, Wisconsin
Bishop Øystein Olsen, Nordic and Baltic Area
Bishop Bruce R. Ough, Ohio West Areas
Bishop Gregory V. Palmer. Iowa Area
Bishop Jeremiah Park, New York Area
Bishop Edward W. Paup, Seattle Area
Bishop Joseph E. Pennel, Jr., Nashville, Tennessee
Bishop Sharon Zimmerman Rader, Chicago, Illinois
Bishop Roy I. Sano, Oakland, California
Bishop John R. Schol, Washington Area
Bishop Beverly Shamana, San Francisco Area
Bishop Ann B. Sherer, Nebraska Area
Bishop F. Herbert Skeete, Riverdale, New York
Bishop Dan E. Solomon, Abilene, Texas
Bishop C. Joseph Sprague, London, Ohio
Bishop Forrest C. Stith, Upper Marlboro, Maryland
Bishop Mack B. Stokes, Waynesville, North Carolina
Bishop Mary Ann Swenson, Los Angeles Area
Bishop Melvin G. Talbert, Brentwood, Tennessee
Bishop Solito K. Toquero, Manila Area, Philippines
Bishop Jack M. Tuell, Des Moines, Washington
Bishop Hans Växby, Eurasia Area
Bishop Hope Morgan Ward, Mississippi Area
Bishop Peter D. Weaver, Boston Area
Bishop Rosemarie Wenner, Germany Area
Bishop D. Frederick Wertz, Carlisle, Pennsylvania
Bishop Timothy W. Whitaker, Florida Area
Bishop Woodie W. White, Atlanta, Georgia
Bishop C. Dale White, Newport, Rhode Island
Bishop Max D. Whitfield, Northwest Texas - New Mexico Area
Bishop Richard B. Wilke, Winfield, Kansas
Bishop Joe A. Wilson, Georgetown, Texas
Bishop Joseph H. Yeakel, Smithsburg, Maryland
UMC.org is the official online ministry of The United Methodist Church -- © 2005 United Methodist Communications
Demand a Moral Budget: Organize a Vigil
This holiday season, Congress will face a decision about whether to cut vital services, such as food stamps and child care, from low-income working families. We must make sure they do what is right. Here's our vision: We want vigils at every senator's and representative's district office on Wednesday, December 14th. Imagine people from diverse faith traditions gathering together to call our leaders to demand a budget that prioritizes the needs of the poorest among us. It will be a collective voice no lawmaker can ignore.
http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/Sojo/event/distributedEventSignup.jsp?distributed_event_K....
More liberal heresy! Don't these people know there's a war on Christmas going on?